It's also irrelevant even if he can for at least two reasons.
1) Driving in the USA is a least common demonator affair. I don't like that it is this way, but to be consistant if something poses a hazard for the LCD driver, then it gets delt with, removed, whatever. Argue the 4 wheelers suck at driving all you want, but the forces that bring us one idiotic traffic scheme after another for the LCD driver would justify removing as many semis from the road as possible. So truckers prove it's the '4-wheeler's' fault. They'll just be providing reason to remove heavy trucks from the road the way things work here in USA.
2) No matter what the truckers say, the heavy truck, the semi, etc is an outlier on the curve of vehicle performance. It is the hazard. It is the vehicle that can't turn well, it's the vehicle that can't brake well, it's the vehicle that can't accelerate well. It's also the vehicle that doesn't match up well wrt to crash equipment. It's the vehicle that due to lobbying lacks proper under-ride bars, etc. Again, the truckers can blame the other guy all they want, but it still remains that the semi is the greater vehicluar hazard.
IMO, the real reason is the great subsidy we all have to pay in taxes for the trucking industry. I don't buy much. I am sure my taxes pay for a great deal more than what I save on the shelf price because of trucking's subsidy. I am sure the damage-wear done to my vehicles from driving on roads pounded to crap by trucks far exceeds any savings in the goods I purchase. I'd rather have trucking pay it's share, taxes reduced and the price of goods reflect the true transportation cost. I'll be ahead in the end.
